After reading the article "Whose lungs are they, anyway?" by Janet Singleton, I was able to determine the proposal at issue. The issue in this article is about why people decide to smoke and who s responsible for making hat decision. Should we put the blame one the tobacco industry or is it just people's own decision to smoke? The position I stand in is I feel that the tobacco industry should not be held responsible for smokers' decision to smoke. I feel this way because the tobacco industry doesn't force anyone to start smoking, that the smokers are made choice by themselves.
Regarding the author's position of whether the tobacco industry or the people themselves should be responsible for people that decide to start smoking, the author places the responsibility on the people themselves. The reason why the author doesn't hold the tobacco industry is that there have been as many attempts to warn people about the negative affects of smoking as the tobacco industry advertises their product. In addition, she states that it's silly that a cartoon camel character actually inspires teenage smoking. Also, she lets us know that she grew up surrounded by smokers, even though this is so, she kept not to smoke, a decision made she made.
I find myself standing on the author's side. However, I do have my disagreements with some of the author's reasoning. First, I would like to point out the area where I agree with the author. That is, I also feel that no matter how hard the tobacco industry try to influence us the use their product, at the end it is still the decision made by people. The cigarette companies don't shove cigarettes in our mouths. I do also agree that many kids take up smoking because they are under nurture and under educated. The one reason that I find myself disagreeing on is that the kids don't influenced by the atmosphere they grow up in. Just because she was not influenced her family of smokers doesn't mean that other kids won't. In my life experience, I have noticed that many of my friends that smoke has parents who smoke. That means kids are very easily influenced in the environment they grow up in. The main reason why I take on the author's position is that I do feel that we have done everything we could to let everyone know of the negative affects of smoking cigarettes.
The smoking issue is very complicated and some of the arguments are beyond the scope of this essay. Still, we can obtain a balanced outlook if we consider the following: the facts of smoking, individual right, societal responsibility, and the stigma of smoking. Haviland and King write essays which contain very important points, but seem to contain a bias which may alienate some people. To truly reach a consensus on the smoking issue, we must be willing to meet each other halfway. We must strike equilibrium between individual right and societal responsibility.
Throughout the essay, he was unsure of which side he should have been on. He discussed his opinion and stories that support both arguments. A smoker knows the effects of smoking, as well as the obvious outcomes. Some smoke for the sake of smoking and most continue to smoke due to the effects of nicotine. Everyone seems to have an opinion on smoking, regardless of whether they do or don't.
The tobacco industry seems like a beneficial addition to our economy. It has basically been a socially acceptable business in the past because it brings jobs to our people and tax money to the government to redistribute; but consider the cost of tobacco related treatment, mortality and disability- it exceeds the benefit to the producer by two hundred billion dollars US. (4) Tobacco is a very profitable industry determined to grow despite government loss or public health. Its history has demonstrated how money can blind morals like an addiction that is never satisfied. Past lawsuits were mostly unsuccessful because the juries blamed the smoker even though the definition of criminal negligence fits the industry’s acts perfectly. Some may argue for the industry in the name of free enterprise but since they have had such a clear understanding of the dangers of their product it changes the understanding of their business tactics and motives. The success of the industry has merely been a reflection of its immoral practices. These practices have been observed through its use of the media in regards to children, the tests that used underage smokers, the use of revenue to avoid the law, the use of nicotine manipulation and the suppression of research.
The first reason why we have to increase the age limit of smoking cigarette is based on the responsibility that one can take. Responsibility can be defined as the state of being responsible for what we are doing, and it is believed any person above the age of 18 is responsible for everything he does. When we come to our topic almost all states set the age of smoking cigarette 18 which is a wrong judgment. Most people give support to this age limit because they believe any person above the age of 18 is considered as an adult and since 18 year old can vote and go to a war, there is no reason to restrict their freedom of choice that includes smoking of a cigarette, but w...
Thank you for smoking, it’s what big companies like Marlboro and Camel want to let us know, and keep smoking. Tobacco has been around for thousands of years, but today’s cigarettes contain many harmful and poisonous toxins. Yet, its simple: Tobacco smoking kills, reduces economic productivity, and strengthens poverty. But lets be frank, everyone’s aware of these issues already, everyone’s out to get cigarette companies; however, there’s a bigger problem. What happens when cigarette companies target today’s children?
There are many explicit premises in this article that I will examine. The first premise is that, Tobacco companies have been and continue to be involved in undermining scientific evidence that documents the health hazards of secondhand smoke. This is more than an hidden assumption, reference from the Los Angles Times reported in November 1999 that the major cigarette companies "are engaged in a far-reaching campaign to discredit evidence that secondhand smoke is harmful to human health." This is my second premise. Here, there is an implied notion that the Los Angels Times conducted a study to find these findings true. The third premise states, Tobacco industry allies recycle old myths and propaganda - and continue to plant the seeds of confusion and doubt as to the economic effects of smoke free air policies - before legislatures and city councils. Here we see the strong initiative that the tobacco companies especially Philips and Morris take to attack policies that go against their business. The next premise is the fourth premise, As in the past, tobacco companies have continued to create and hide behind front groups to lobby against tobacco control and public health policies. This is another implied notion, which we can say that tobacco companies are trying to control the regulations on tobacco.
Some actions should be taken on tobacco products because the risk of getting cancer is high. People vape everywhere in today’s society, blowing a massive amount of smoke that lingers in the air and could cause people nearby to cough or even children near it to cough. There needs to be a policy to ban cigarettes, it kills the smoker, in addition, it could kill the person exposed to the smoke from cigarettes. “The cigarette is also a defective product, meaning not just dangerous but unreasonably dangerous, killing half its long-term users” (Proctor). Cigarettes are not healthy in any way making it a defective product, it mainly kills the smoker rather than helping them.
Every year cigarette smoking is responsible for 500,000 premature deaths (Nugel), you do not want to be just another statistic, do you? America’s first cash crop was tobacco. That means that tobacco has been around for a really long time. It was not until 1865, though, that cigarettes were sold commercially. They were sold to soldiers at the end of the Civil War (Dowshen). From then, cigarettes spread like wildfire, and it was not until 1964 that anyone made a stand about the negative effects of tobacco and cigarettes. People start smoking for all different reasons, some to fit in and some to “escape”. Regardless, it is a horrible habit. 3900 children will try their first cigarette today. Amongst adults who currently smoke, 68% of them began at age 18 or younger, and 85% at 21 or younger (American Lung Association). And of all those people, 70% say if they were given another chance they would never have picked up that first cigarette (Tobacco Free Maine). Smoking is responsible for 1 and 5 deaths in the united states, and is the number one preventable cause of death (NLH). Smoking burns and there is no doubt about that, but before one picks up that cigarette, understand the negative effects on not only oneself, but others affected by ones poor choices, like second-hand smoke. Because of smoking cigarettes, many types of cancer, decrease of life quality, and negative health effects have become all too common in the world today.
Smoking cigarettes is a detrimental practice not only to the smoker, but also to everyone around the smoker. According to an article from the American Lung Association, “Health Effects” (n.d.), “Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S., causing over 438,000 deaths per year”. The umbrella term for tobacco use includes the use of cigarettes, cigars, e-cigs and chewing tobacco. While tobacco causes adverse health consequences, it also has been a unifying factor for change in public health. While the tobacco industries targets specific populations, public health specifically targets smokers, possible smokers, and the public to influence cessation, policies and education.
In the years 1950-1968, the tobacco industries knew that their product was harmful and didn¹t decide to warn the American public until the year 1969. Because of the tobacco companies irresponsibility, our older generations are enduring painful, inevitable deaths. The tobacco companies have been arguing for years that no studies have been done within their company about the correlation of cigarette smoking and lung cancer and that they are ignorant on that matter. They have been keeping things from us for years while studies outside the tobacco companies had been done to help prove that smoking is harmful in the short and long runs to one¹s health. There was a memo written in 1963 marked ³strictly private and confidential² which stated,² moreover, nicotine is addictive... We are then in the business of selling nicotine, an addictive drug effective in the release of stress mechanisms.²(Hwang). If the tobacco companies were in fact ³ignorant² on the correlation between their product and lung cancer along with other diseases, then they should make themselves more educated about their own product or suffer the consequences and face law suits from the government and citizens of America. But, in fact, the tobacco companies have known for years what is really in each cigarette and how it really might affect us in the long run.
Many people choose to smoke. They have their own reasons for doing it, and some feel very strongly about their smoking habit. They may make many arguments as to why they smoke. We believe that they have some valid arguments, but we have opposing viewpoints on this subject.
R.J. Reynolds used an animated camel named Joe the Camel to sell Camel cigarettes. The use of the animated camel was seen as way to entice children to smoke cigarettes. Thirdly, it was shown that there is a positive impact to revenue collection as the contribution of excise taxes is smaller than the health costs associated with the caring of those adversely affected by tobacco use. Lastly, a reduction in smoking increased employment as people used the money saved from purchasing tobacco to purchase other products resulting in an increase of jobs for the manufacture of other
.I believe that the Tobacco industry is unethical, They provide a product that causes addiction and eventual death if smoking continues thought the majority of a person’s life. I think that the tobacco industry needs to take more responsibility for their product. I believe they should do this by not advertising on the false image of being a cigarette smoker and focus on what consumers are actually going to receive for their money when purchasing cigarettes. They should focus on the feeling it gives people, and what the cigarette experience actually is in the most literal terms. Also cigarette companies should tell costumers upfront in easy to read labels the long term and short term effects of smoking to let people clearly know what they are buying and what it’s effects are.
This was in a case which started in 1991 and ended in 1997 as internal industry documents describing 14-24 year olds as 'tomorrow 's cigarette business ' was released in USA. Their third argument was that the revenue, concluded by analysts, from cigarettes was invalid as they estimated that cigarettes contributed only 0.14% of the G.D.P and the health costs about 0.21% of the G.D.P. Their fourth argument was that a study on tobacco consumption and employment showed effective policies to reduce smoking but increased employment. Instead of people spending money on cigarettes, they invested it in goods and services thereby creating more jobs. Their fifth argument was that of the impact of cigarette advertising on consumers. According to a World Bank report, it advised policy makers to completely ban tobacco advertising and promotion, they should cover completely all media and all uses of brand names and logos. It also published the details of a comprehensive study of over 100 countries, comparing the consumption trends over time in those countries where they were relatively complete bans on advertising and promotion and where they were no such bans. It
The sale of cigarettes and tobacco is a multi-billion dollar industry, but is it truly worth all the problems that stem from their use? Health care costs are extremely high due to all the health problems associated with cigarettes and tobacco. Even though research has proven time and time again the harmful effects of cigarettes, and the rising cost of health care caused by cigarettes, our government will not take a stand and stop all manufacturing of the horrible toxins. Every year, new medical reports are issued regarding the harmful effects of smoking cigarettes. Hundreds of thousands of people around the world die every year from diseases caused by smoking.